[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: SEUL: Mail got bounced: Here are a few msgs that didn't get through...
>
> I dunno what happened, but here they are...comment if you want!
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> Re: SEUL: Re: What's the diff to SEUL ?
> Date:
> Sat, 17 Jan 1998 16:58:27 -0800
> From:
> Micah Yoder <yoderm@geocities.com>
> To:
> George Bonser <grep@oriole.sbay.org>
> CC:
> kde-distribution@thunder.dorm.duke.edu,
> seul-project@seul.org
> References:
> 1
>
>
> George Bonser wrote:
>
> > > Because it's there! Of everything I've seen, and I scan the web
> > > regularly, it absolutely the best and most complete desktop available.
> > > It's actually usable NOW. GNOME has a long way to go, but I hope it gets
> > > there, and e-linux may switch over when it's done. If e-linux and SEUL
> > > use the same basic distibution, the two could merge easily in the
> > > future.
> > >
> > > -Chris
> >
> > And their instance on usinmg KDE will absolutely kill the product. It will
> > prevent anyone from selling their distribution and will prevent all but
> > the large companies from developing packages for it.
>
> No way! The Qt license fully allows for it to be included in a Linux
> distribution. Other distribs (Suse and I think another) are using it.
>
> I almost think Suse could start to replace RedHat as the "favorite" on
> this issue alone....KDE is a very nice desktop, NOW!
>
> ---------------------------------
> Subject:
> Re: SEUL: Re: What's the diff to SEUL ?
> Date:
> Sat, 17 Jan 1998 17:09:36 -0800
> From:
> Micah Yoder <yoderm@geocities.com>
> To:
> "Erik Walthinsen (Omega)" <omega@sequent.com>
> CC:
> seul-project@seul.org
> References:
> 1
>
>
> Erik Walthinsen (Omega) wrote:
>
> > > I think it's rediculous to base an entire
> > > environment/dis' on on a single set of widgets/lib's, non-free to boot.
> > > Next year they decide to change the license and it's all over.
> > > Unuseable. What then? Buy the QT package? Could this be their
> > > alterior motive to start with?
> >
> > Very well put. (conspiracy theory, here we come... :) I believe that
> > e-Linux's goal to use KDE/Qt is misguided for the above reasons. There is
> > no way to guarantee that Qt will remain available, which sets up the
> > project (KDE, and thus e-Linux) to be dropped into the bit bucket as soon
> > as the people at Troll Tech realize there is much money to be made.
>
> Not a chance. The most recent version (1.31) will always be under the
> free license, even if a certain place freezes over and they change the
> license on future versions. In that case, the FAQ also said it's
> possible to extend 1.31 using OOP inheritance.
>
I sent a mail with title "Dispelling fallacies about Qt" with a
demonstration of why the Qt license would allow the use of KDE even if
Troll changes the license. But also about the real dangers of Qt and
why having the dominant Linux desktop based on it would be a bad idea.
So better avoid helping KDE by including it in distributions.
> > I have nothing against Qt/Troll Tech, or commercial development. I just
> > think it is pure folly to write an otherwise GPL'd (I think) environment,
> > un top of a non-free library.
>
> I pretty much agree ..... but I do urge us not to completely ignore all
> Qt software. It's not half as bad as you guys are making it out to be!
>
Qt software in small apps like Ezppp is one thing, a desktop like KDE
with its potential to become the federator of Linux GUI is another.
>
> Is there a decent fledgling word processor project in the works? I know
> there used to be Wurd but I haven't been able to find it lately.
>
There is Andrew but is not really a WP its main use was for composing
multimedia documents. The one real sized free WP I know is Thot
(http://www.inrialpes.fr).
> Yep......we really need a freeware office suite under the GTK, and
> that's probably where some of us (more app-minded people) should start
> focusing our attention. I don't even know of anything that would serve
> as a good base, so we'd have to start from scratch. I want something
> that can compare with Office97...... plus, have the Web publishing
> features of Fr*ntPage and the workgroup integration features of Lotus
> SmartSuite. A big task, but the sooner we start, the sooner it gets
> done!
>
For designing a good Office suit it is more important to have good
ergonomists and good font designers than good programmers. For that
reason and because it is nor so fun nor so prestigious to write the
free software community have never produced products able to compete
with commercail software.
The one thing we can do is dispelling the myth than there is no Office
suits for Linux. I have seen many people who were very ignorant about
what is available for Linux. Include a catalog of what is available,
so than they can look in and find what they need. Better having them
use Applixware with Linux than Word with Windows95.
> -----------------------------------------
> Subject:
> Re: SEUL: Re: What's the diff to SEUL ?
> Date:
> Sat, 17 Jan 1998 17:49:24 -0800
> From:
> Micah Yoder <yoderm@geocities.com>
> To:
> Erik Walthinsen <omega@omegacs.net>
> CC:
> Chris Barker <cbarker@ce.berkeley.edu>,
> kde-distribution@thunder.dorm.duke.edu,
> seul-project@seul.org
> References:
> 1
>
>
> Erik Walthinsen wrote:
>
> > It may not be so much that issue, but the cost for developers. And that, in
> > the long run, is a tremendous cost to Linux. Developers will not go for
> > Linux if it will cost them more money. Granted, they already spend $$$$$ on
> > Windoze development, but that's 85+% of the market. Why would they spend
> > money on a Linux port when there are very few customers.
>
> But the Qt license would allow them to develop for *all* UNIX platforms,
> *and* Windoze. GTK doesn't do that.
>
> > > As for developers, while QT's fee seems huge to use individuals, it's
> > > really not all that big if you consider how much labor can be saved.
> > How is GNOME any different? A toolkit is a toolkit, +-. Personally, I
> > wouldn't even *consider* spending $5000 on Qt when I can use GNOME for free.
>
> Last I checked, the X only license was well under $2000 (I forget if it
> was $1200 or $1600...something like that). The license for Doze and X
> was about $2200.
>
Qt is free for writing GPLed software and you have the right to put
that software in CDs. Moreover you can use Qt without fee to _run_
programs. And you can distribute Qt. The restriction is in its use
for writing commercial programs.
> More expensive than GTK, but it is a REALLY nice toolkit. And it will
> only be a fraction of the cost you'd pay a programmer to port the
> software anyway.
>
> Considering that Qt is stable and well designed and probably better laid
> out than GTK, the cost of the programmer's time fiddling with GTK would
> probably outweigh the cost of Qt.
>
> [Again, I'm not advocating us basing anything on it.......just don't
> ignore it!]
>
Excessive Qt use can be harmful. See the reasons in "Dispelling
fallacies"
> > As has been pointed out by someone else, KDE and Qt seem to be very
> > non-reentrant. If one part of KDE freezes, the entire system goes with it.
>
> Hmm... My KDE desktop *did* lock up once, after I switched to a console
> with Ctrl-Alt-F2 and back to X a few times. I had to hit reset. I
> could move the mouse and scroll the X virtual screen, and I think the
> network services were still running, but I couldn't get the computer's
> attention in any way. I am still using Beta 1 though. I'll upgrade
> when Beta 3 comes out. And it *usually* works just fine when switching
> in and out of X.
>
> If only I had my ethernet setup working so I could telnet in from my
> laptop and kill X......
>
Doubt this have to do with QT, I wouldtend to point at KDE.
--
Jean Francois Martinez
==================== The Linux. Use the Linux, Luke! =======================